Abstract
Objective
To analyze the effect of intrathecal (IT) chemotherapy for disseminated medulloblastoma.
Materials and methods
Twenty-one patients received IT chemotherapy using the chemotherapeutic agents of methotrexate (MTX) and nitrosoureas (ACNU, MCNU) including nine patients for residual leptomeningeal lesions after initial surgery and radiation, and 12 for a recurrence with leptomeningeal dissemination. Of these 21 patients, 12 received a lumbar and/or ventricular bolus injection of the chemotherapeutic agents, one received the ventriculolumbar perfusion of the agents, and eight received both the perfusion and bolus injection. The doses ranged from 6–7 mg/m2 of ACNU for perfusion and 3–3.5 mg/m2 of ACNU, MCNU, or MTX for the bolus injection, and the cycles were administered from 3 to 12 times for perfusion and from 5 to 54 times for the bolus injection. The effects of chemotherapy were assessed by both radiological and cytological examinations, and the clinical symptoms were also assessed. Radiological and/or cytological responses were observed in 10 of 21 patients (47.6%), including seven cases demonstrating a complete remission. The 5-year overall survival rate and 5-year survival rate after dissemination were 61.5 and 46.4%, respectively. Five patients who received a lumbar bolus injection of nitrosoureas experienced paraplegia and double incontinence. One patient who received a ventricular injection of nitrosoureas experienced truncal ataxia.
Conclusion
IT chemotherapy was found to be effective in some cases with refractory disseminated medulloblastoma and it seems to be an appropriate treatment choice for leptomeningeal recurrence. However, the frequent bolus injections of nitrosoureas should be avoided to prevent the side effects.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Bomgaars L, Geyer JR, Franklin J, Dahl G, Park J, Winick NJ, Klenke R, Berg SL, Blaney SM (2004) Phase II trial of intrathecal liposomal cytarabine in children with neoplastic meningitis. J Clin Oncol 22:3916–3921
Edwards MS, Levine VA, Seager ML, Wilson CB (1981) Intrathecal chemotherapy for leptomeningeal dissemination of medulloblastoma. Child Brain 8:444–451
Kochi M, Kuratsu J, Mihara Y, Takaki S, Seto H, Uemura S, Ushio Y (1993) Ventriculolumbar perfusion of 3-[(4-amino-2-methyl-5-pyrimidinyl)methyl]-1-(2-chloroethyl)-1-nitrosourea hydrochloride. Neurosurgery 33:817–823
Morikawa N, Mori T, Kawashima H, Takeyama M, Abe T, Kobayashi H (2001) Pharmacokinetics of nimustine, cytosine arabinoside, and methotrexate in cerebrospinal fluid perfusion chemotherapy. Biol Pharm Bull 24:436–438
Ruggiero A, Conter V, Milani M, Biagi E, Lazzareschi I, Sparano P, Ricardi R (2001) Intrathecal chemotherapy with antineoplastic agent in children. Paediatr Drugs 3:237–246
Rutkowski S, Bode U, Deinlein F, Ottensmeier H, Warmuth-Metz M, Soerensen N, Graf N, Emser A, Pietsch T, Wolf JEA, Kortmann RD, Kuehl J (2005) Treatment of early childhood medulloblastoma by postoperative chemotherapy alone. N Engl J Med 352:978–986
Salvac I, Shuller E, Czech T, Hainfellner JA, Seidl R, Dieckmann K (1998) Intrathecal mafosfamide therapy for pediatric brain tumors with meningeal dissemination. J Neurooncol 38:213–218
Shapiro WR (1975) Chemotherapy of primary malignant brain tumors in children. Cancer 35:965–972
Shapiro WR, Young DF, Mehta B (1975) Methotrexate: distribution in cerebrospinal fluid after intravenous, ventricular and lumbar injections. N Engl J Med 293:161–166
Ushio U, Kochi M, Kitamura I, Kuratsu J (1998) Ventriculolumbar perfusion of 3-[(4-amino-2-methyl-5-pyrimidinyl)methyl]-1-(2-chloroethyl)-1-nitrosourea hydrochloride for subarachnoid dissemination of gliomas. J Neurooncol 38:207–212
Yoshida S, Morii K (2005) Intrathecal chemotherapy for patients with meningeal carcinomatosis. Surg Neurol 63:52–55
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Yoshimura, J., Nishiyama, K., Mori, H. et al. Intrathecal chemotherapy for refractory disseminated medulloblastoma. Childs Nerv Syst 24, 581–585 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00381-007-0538-8
Received:
Revised:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00381-007-0538-8